Reading the signs in the Whitefeather Forest cultural landscape, northwestern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
s boreal forest, natural resources planning, management and governance are increasingly becoming shared amongst different cultural groups.Criteria and lndicators (C&l) have become a leading tool for assessing sustainability, for guiding natural resources management planning and decision-making, and for monitoring ecological change.However, there are few examples of 1) the processes by which a shared understanding of lndigenous C&|, grounded in local knowledge, values and institutions can be developed, and2) what a local-levelAboriginal C&l framework, grounded in local values and institutions, would look like.This research, undertaken collaboratively with Pikangikum First Nation (PFN) and the Whitefeather Forest Management Corporation (WFMC), attempts to address these knowledge gaps through the following objectives:1. Develop an understanding of Pikangikum values for Keeping the Land, and the institutions through which they are fostered and actualized (i.e.Ahneesheenahbay ways of knowing, practices and beliefs).2. Cooperatively develop a framework to both articulate and communicate the values, knowledge and institutions for Keeping the Land.3. Develop an understanding of how these values represent criteria for Keeping the Land, how Pikangikum people perceive these signs (i.e.indicators) of social-ecological variability in the Whitefeather Forest, and how these sgns contribute to: a. Monitoring, responding and adapting to change, and b.Maintaining the values, knowledge and institutions for Keeping the Land.Methods for this undertaking included review of narratives gathered throughout the Whitefeather Forest community-based land use planning process as well as collaborative workshops with community lders.Approached from a cooperative learning perspective, the research was participatory and iterative in nature.This approach allowed for the co-production of a holistic cultural landscape framework and the development of shared understandings of the values and institutions for Keeping the Land.Keeping the Land must begin with Ohneesheesheen, to have good mental, spiritual, physical, emotional health, and practice activities properly on the land to create well- being in yourself and in your actions.To be able to create Cheemeenooweecheeteeyaung, to build good relationships with family, community, and the Creator and to form partnerships with people from other cultures, everything must be good.These relationships, in turn, are what make Oohnuhcheekayween possible (i.e.planning for the future, and making decisions for the community that will have positive social, economic, and environmental outcomes).This planning and decision-making will ensure that Ailneesheenahbayweepeemahteeseeween, the Pikangikum way of life, will continue as it should and that the land will continue to be kept.As criteria are values, and indicators arise from values (Meadows 1998), the cultural landscape framework was also developed into a local-level approach to monitoring Keeping the Land.Pikangikum's approach to criteria and indicators (C&ls) are based on held values embedded in Ahneesheenahbay worldview, beliefs, and rules of proper conduct with the land.This study presents an example of a place-based learning community, where collaborative learning resulted in the co-production of new knowledge.This knowledge is based on a shared understanding of Pikangikum values and institutions for Keeping the Land, and as such can contribute to building a new approach to Natural Resources and Environmental Management (NREM).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".